Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beverly Hills Vamp

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. passes WP:NFILM and WP:GNG after improvements and addition of missing refs by participants (non-admin closure) Run n Fly (talk) 15:55, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Beverly Hills Vamp[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No RS, no notable reviews. Fails WP:NFILM. PROD was removed with no explanation given. Mottezen (talk) 07:40, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Mottezen (talk) 07:40, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Mottezen (talk) 07:40, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I've found some mild coverage, it could pass as a weak keep now but I'd like to try to find more to make it a firmer keep on my end. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 16:32, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Enough coverage to pass WP:GNG Donaldd23 (talk) 13:12, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per the reliable sources reviews that have been added to the article so that WP:GNG is passed and deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 00:25, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.